Moorside Legal county court hearing

jimbo39

Hi everyone,

I have been lurking on here about a private parking ticket I got back in 2022 from UKCPS for parking in a visitor bay allocated for people in my apartment building. I followed the template defences and it is now at the hearing stage. I currently have one of the template witness statements that needs to be sent to the court by 25th February.

A bit of backround on the ticket….so I have a copy of my lease and it states I have a numbered parking bay but also highlights under the section “common parts” that I have the right to park in a VP spot also. Moorside requested the lease to check this but they are still proceeding with the hearing and have emailed me today to say they have paid the hearing fee. Looks like I will be going to the hearing then.

This is the witness statement that I am using from one of the other users here that had a similar situation to me….

IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No.:
Between

UK Car Park Management
(Claimant)

-and-

(Defendant)

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. The Particulars of Claim on the N1 Claim Form refer to 'Parking Charge(s)' incurred on 26/03/07. However, they do not state the basis of any purported liability for these charges, in that they do not state what the terms of parking were, or in what way they are alleged to have been breached. In addition, the particulars state 'The Defendant was driving the vehicle and/or is the keeper of the vehicle' which indicates that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5.
3. The Particulars refer to the material location as ”XXX”. The Defendant has, since 16th November 2016, held legal title under the terms of a lease, to “XXX” at that location. At some point, the managing agents contracted with the Claimant company to enforce parking conditions at the estate.
4. The outside car parking area contains allocated parking spaces demised to some residents, and a general area for residents who do not have an allocated space.
5. Under the terms of the Defendant's lease, one reference is made about parking motor vehicles. The reference is simply in the header of the lease stating that the overall lease arrangement is for the apartment and an allocated parking space.

5.1. There are no terms within the lease requiring lessees to display parking permits, or to pay penalties to third parties, such as the Claimant, for non-display of same.

1. The Defendant, at all material times, parked in accordance with the terms granted by the lease. The erection of the Claimant's signage, and the purported contractual terms conveyed therein, are incapable of binding the Defendant in any way, and their existence does not constitute a legally valid variation of the terms of the lease. Accordingly, the Defendant denies having breached any contractual terms whether express, implied, or by conduct.
2. The Claimant, or Managing Agent, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders, pursuant to s37 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1987, and the Defendant is unaware of any such vote having been passed by the residents.
3. Further and in the alternative, the signs refer to 'Authorised Vehicles Only/Terms of parking without permission', and suggest that by parking without permission, motorists are contractually agreeing to a parking charge of £100. This is clearly a nonsense, since if there is no permission, there is no offer, and therefore no contract.

8.1. The Defendant's vehicle clearly was 'authorised' as per the lease and the Defendant relies on primacy of contract and avers that the Claimant's conduct in aggressive ticketing is in fact a matter of tortious interference, being a private nuisance to residents. In this case the Claimant continues to cause a substantial and unreasonable interference with the Defendant's land/property, or his/her use or enjoyment of that land/property.

1. The Claimant may rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 as a binding precedent on the lower court. However, that only assists the Claimant if the facts of the case are the same, or broadly the same. In Beavis, it was common ground between the parties that the terms of a contract had been breached, whereas it is the Defendant's position that no such breach occurred in this case, because there was no valid contract, and also because the 'legitimate interest' in enforcing parking rules for retailers and shoppers in Beavis does not apply to these circumstances. Therefore, this case can be distinguished from Beavis on the facts and circumstances.
2. The Claimant, or their legal representatives, has added additional sums to the original £100 parking charge, for which no explanation or justification has been provided. Schedule 4 of the Protection Of Freedoms Act, at 4(5), states that the maximum sum which can be recovered is that specified in the Notice to Keeper, which is £100 in this instance. It is submitted that this is an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which the Court should not uphold, even in the event that Judgment for Claimant is awarded.
3. For all or any of the reasons stated above, the Court is invited to dismiss the Claim in its entirety. Given that the claim is based on an alleged contractual parking charge of £100 - already significantly inflated and mostly representing profit, as was found in Beavis - but the amount claimed on the claim form is inexplicably £251.71, the Defendant avers that this inflation of the considered amount is a gross abuse of process.

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

(Defendant)

I am just checking if you guys think this is the right defence? I can post more info about the ticket etc if needed.

I also wanted to ask how I go about the counter claim for costs?

Thanks all

Gr1pr

First of all, your defence is already on file , you seem to be at the Witness Statement stage

Secondly, your statement of truth was retired 5 years ago

Counter claims are made and paid for at the defence stage, months ago

You provide a written costs assessment in order to ask for costs

jimbo39

Yes sorry I meant to say Witness statement stage not defence.

Do I just bring a costs statement with me to the hearing?

Coupon-mad

No. You need to file & serve it with your WS and exhibits, before your deadline which is on page 2 of the hearing order.

What you have shown us is a defence.

Bin it.

You must now produce a WS and evidence, as explained in the second post of the Newbies thread with over ten exhibits suggested to use.

Nobody ever seems to read that part … so sometimes I think I might just delete it as it is frustrating to set all that WS & evidence advice and links out, then no-one uses that resource!

Once you've read it and grabbed half a dozen ideas for exhibits, search the forum for:

residential lease Duchess Bedford witness true

Coupon-mad

But show us the defence you put in.

Verbatim please, not an overview.

jimbo39

Yes I will post here before I send anything to the court. I thought what I posted was a witness statement I’d found through the links but will look again. Cheers

Coupon-mad

Defence please. We need to see it verbatim.

jimbo39

I cant seem to find the defence I submitted online to the court. Is there a way of retrieving it?

Coupon-mad

Ring the CNBC.

Is it not showing on MCOL?

jimbo39

No I logged into MCOL and there is nothing at all showing there. Will try ringing the court

Coupon-mad

But there won't be 'nothing at all' showing on MCOL. It has your case history.

Must admit, I don't use MCOL so I have no idea if it retains a link to your defence but it makes sense it should.

Amazed you didn't keep a copy though. Any official stuff include, especially to do with money (not just court claim submissions) you'd definitely keep a copy. Not sure how you planned to do a Witness Statement and a hearing (sitting in front of a judge not knowing what your defence said) … but it's a wake up call to get it now.